I'm sure small business owners will feel great about that, they just have to wait for the productivity increase Ian is talking about, hitting their shop.
LABOR is worried. The public isn’t stupid, after all, and doesn’t believe governments can or should “save” jobs.
We’re all consumers now. If we want to save Qantas, we’ll fly it.
If we want to save our car industry, we’ll buy a Holden or Ford.
If we want to save SPC Ardmona, we’ll buy a tin of peaches.
And if we don’t buy that ticket, car or tin, the Government should get its hands out of our pockets. Don’t force us to donate to companies that didn’t earn our business.
I defy any left-leaner to find a flaw in this proposition espoused by Andrew Bolt. For once he gets it exactly right.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...-for-local-firms/story-fni0ffxg-1226849573464
What he says is fair enough, but it's indicative of what happens when we let our industries get sold off to foreigners who think they can tell what we want from the other side of the world.
Let the foreigners depart, and then get the industries back in local hands. That requires government investment because the local business sector is too gutless to take any risks without some sort of government guarantee.
When all else fails, fall back on good ol' fashioned xenophobia. You sound about 30 years out of date.
Look at all those foreigners, with no idea what Australians want. I'm sure you're shocked the Morphy Richards toaster isn't in there.
View attachment 57167
http://cdn.marketingmag.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/added-value-culture-aus.png
Microsoft, Google, it's easy to sell cr@p to people when you are a virtual monopoly.
It's not about sales, it's about brands.
.
You are obviously one who falls for the brand hype. Lots of suckers in this country it seems.
Perhaps. But I can spot a troll a mile away.
Will be interesting to see how things change for access to the Commonwealth Seniors card.
I can't believe they set a $50K limit - that's in the 7th income decile for a single person income (863-1,054), but the Senior could be paying no tax on this so could be equivalent to the 8th income decile ie they could be beating at least 60-70% of the population on income and still received all the generous perks of the seniors card. Talk about age of entitlement with emphasis on welfare based on age not need.
Sadly Labor is already showing they will take the low road, but then Queensland Coalition MP Andrew Laming has also called for Seniors to rise up so I doubt we'll see any meaningful reforms.
FYI - 1 in 10 tax dollars goes to the aged pension already
And that demonstrates the very message that the government would be sending to future retirees if they penalise self funded retirees on the small concession they receive via the CSHC.It's about screwing the self funded, that have saved $1m in super and are getting $35,000 in term deposits.lol
Make them pay for the frugality, that will teach everyone to spend instead of saving.
Thank god for karma.lol
And that demonstrates the very message that the government would be sending to future retirees if they penalise self funded retirees on the small concession they receive via the CSHC.
There comes a point when people are just going to say, to hell with making the effort to be self funded: might as well spend up before reaching age pension age and qualify for full or substantial part pension.
That would be a very short sighted approach imo.
And that demonstrates the very message that the government would be sending to future retirees if they penalise self funded retirees on the small concession they receive via the CSHC.
There comes a point when people are just going to say, to hell with making the effort to be self funded: might as well spend up before reaching age pension age and qualify for full or substantial part pension.
That would be a very short sighted approach imo.
Yes, and then all Syds worries come home to roost.
Everyone has a minimal amount in super, get maximum pension and had a great time on the way.lol
However, the government has upped the after tax limit to $180k/anum, which if they play around too much with the rules, will end up as you say "no one putting extra in".
So one hopes the Government isn't as short sighted.
How much of a retirement income should the Government provide tax incentives to achieve? Between the tax foregone and the $20B or so in fees siphoned out by the industry, it would be cheaper to just provide everyone with the pension.?
The great lark is to load up on debt, take out a lump sum to pay it off, holiday, new car then get the full pension while sitting on a small fortune called the primary residence. The aged pension cost to the budget has increased by $13B a year in a decade. It's an unsustainable system. The aged budget is already over $50B a year and the boomers have barely begun retiring or increasing the demands on the health budget. How does a rapidly shrinking tax paying population keep things running? We peaked at 1.5 workers per dependant in 2010. By 2020 it'll be just 1.4 and 2030 down to 1.3. .?
The top 5% of income earners receive over 20% of Government funding for super. Why? It's quite likely these people would have enough assets to not be eligible for a pension, so why do they receive around $3.3B in annual funding on their contributions? Why do the millions of low income earners pay 15% more tax on their contributions than income earned, or at best get a 4% reduction in their tax.?
Ask yourself, how much effort it would take you to save enough to supply yourself with a $32,000 dollar pension.
Also we are talking about saving it over the last 30 years.
For a comparison working on on inflation of 5% in thirty years you will have to have saved enough to better a pension of $94,000/ year.
Then to better a pension or equal a pension of $94,000 at 4% return(which are current rates) you will need to have saved $2.5million.
While your neighbour spends everything, has a ball and gets $94k, then someone tells you, What's your problem.lol
Most people who have substantial sums in their super tend to take it as a self funded pension.
Those who have low amounts tend to spend it and access the government aged pension.
So again, your focus on wanting to penalise savers, and promote spending.
How many of the top 5% of income earners will access a government aged pension?
Forget about the top 5%.
Think about the 'joe average'.
Most people fall into the middle to low income earners
Some have saved enough, by doing without, to self fund.
Some have spent everything and recieve the equivilent of $850,000 in the bank at 3.5%.
I know who I feel sorry for.
Pointless continueing the 'super' loop.
How about this for a missed opportunity, Lynas, they mine the rare eath minerals in W.A.
However they decided to build the processing plant in Malaysia, well it has gone frrom bad to worse for them.
Maybe if they had processed it here, they would now be making a profit.
It just looks like, they are being held to ransom.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/wa/a/21918028/lynas-flags-need-for-more-cash/
By the way I have no interest or holding in them, just see it as another company trying to rip out our minerals and value add offshore.
It really is the root cause of our problems.IMO
This is the issue the Government has to address, value adding here, is just as easy as in Malaysia.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?